ArticleClinical and experimental otorhinolaryngology2021
Potential Implications of Slim Modiolar Electrodes for Severely Malformed Cochleae: A Comparison With the Straight Array With Circumferential Electrodes.
Article in Clinical and experimental otorhinolaryngology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- WFS1 autosomal dominant variants linked with hearing loss: update on structural analysis and cochlear implant outcome.BMC medical genomics · 2023Pooled it
- Etiology-Driven Personalized Cochlear Implantation: Implications for Electrode Choice, Timing, and Outcomes.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
- Precision Medicine Approach to Cochlear Implantation.Clinical and experimental otorhinolaryngology · 2022Review
- Functional Outcomes of Cochlear Implantation in Children with Bilateral Cochlear Nerve Aplasia.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
- Genetic Load of Alternations of Transcription Factor Genes in Non-Syndromic Deafness and the Associated Clinical Phenotypes: Experience from Two Tertiary Referral Centers.Biomedicines · 2022Article
- How to Maximize the Outcomes of Cochlear Implantation in Common Cavity and Cochlear Aplasia With Dilated Vestibule, the Most Severe Inner Ear Anomalies?Clinical and experimental otorhinolaryngology · 2022Article
- Effects of CoQ10 Replacement Therapy on the Audiological Characteristics of Pediatric Patients withBioMed research international · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesMalformations of the inner ear account for approximately 20% of cases of congenital deafness. In current practice, straight arrays with circumferential electrodes (i.e., full-banded electrodes) are widely used in severely malformed cochleae. However, the unpredictability of the location of residual spiral ganglion neurons in such malformations argues against obligatorily using full-banded electrodes in all cases. Here, we present our experience of electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) and radiography-based selection of an appropriate electrode for severely malformed cochleae.
methodsThree patients with severely malformed cochleae, showing cochlear hypoplasia type II (CH-II), incomplete partition type I (IP-I), and cochlear aplasia with a dilated vestibule (CADV), respectively, were included, and the cochlear nerve deficiency (CND) was evaluated. A full-banded electrode (CI24RE(ST)) and slim modiolar electrode (CI632) were alternately inserted to compare ECAP responses and electrode position.
resultsIn patient 1 (CH-II with CND), who had initially undergone cochlear implantation (CI) using a lateral wall electrode (CI422), revision CI was performed due to incomplete insertion of CI422 and resultant unsatisfactory performance by explanting the CI422 and re-inserting the CI24RE(ST) and CI632 sequentially. Although both electrodes elicited reliable ECAP responses with correct positioning, CI24RE(ST) showed overall lower ECAP thresholds compared to CI632; thus, CI24RE(ST) was selected. In patient 2 (IP-I with CND), CI632 elicited superior ECAP responses relative to CI24RE(ST), with correct positioning of the electrode; CI632 was chosen. In patient 3 (CADV), CI632 did not elicit an ECAP response, while meaningful ECAP responses were obtained with the CI24RE(ST) array once correct positioning was achieved. All patients' auditory performance markedly improved postoperatively.
conclusionThe ECAP and radiography-based strategy to identify an appropriate electrode may be useful for severely malformed cochleae, leading to enhanced functional outcomes. The practice of sticking to full-banded straight electrodes may not always be optimal for IP-I and CH-II.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.